Originally Posted by: stackny-DNA has never occured in nature and hasnt even been made in a lab under controlled conditions.[/QUOTE]
So you're not creating new DNA when you procreate?

Originally Posted by: stackny
-Even if DNA could have occured in nature it would still need a living cell to carry out its function and replicate.[/QUOTE]
Well, if DNA did spontaneously occur then there's probably a good chance there was a living cell nearby.

Originally Posted by: stackny
-Amino Acids have never been found to occur in nature and only have been made in a lab under intensely controlled conditions.[/QUOTE]
Didn't we discuss in the "and that's it..." thread how amino acids actually have been created in a lab? Didn't someone post a link to a news article discussing this? And didn't you deny its validity even though it was still amino acid which was what you were saying hasn't been created in the first place?

Originally Posted by: stackny
-If organisms could arise from the primordial soup, then there couldnt have been oxygen in the atmosphere or else they wouldve been oxidized into simpler substances. This creates a bigger problem than it destroys because without oxygen, there is no ozone and they woudve been exposed directly to ultraviolet rays, burning them to a crisp. [/QUOTE]
Well, no one's said that life spontaneously occurred. Even spontaneous combustion isn't as sponatneous as the name implies. Things take time to develop. And while, yes we would become a simpler organism, that completely ignores the entire basis of evolution. Starting as something simple and growing into something more complex.

Originally Posted by: stackny
-There is a severe lack of fossil evidence supporting the theory of evolution. Transitional fossils should be everywhere.[/QUOTE]
That's simply just not true. There have been transitional fossils everywhere. Just because there aren't as many as you seem to think are necessary, doesn't mean that there aren't any.


[QUOTE=stackny]
-Heres a quote from the father of the evolutionary theory himself on transitionals.

“But just in proportion as this process of extermination has acted on an enormous scale, so must the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record”. {Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, First Collier Books Edition, p. 308}.

And that helps your case how? It doesn't disprove anything. It just suggests that a different approach needs to be taken.

[QUOTE=stackny]
-No mutation has ever been found to increase genetic information and is always a loss of existing information. Mutations have been found to almost always make an organism worse off from what it originally was.

Probably because when a mutation survives it's calle adaptation. Mutations are chemical imperfections, which is the opposite of evolution, so of course things are going to have a hard time evolving through mutations.

[QUOTE=stackny]
- Evidence against a gradual evolution can be found through the Cambrian Explosion. This is where animal fossils essentially appeared from nowhere in the Cambrian Strata. Fossils from every phyla have been found in the Cambrian Strata, supporting the fact that all these organisms coexisted. The fossils in the Precambrian layer (next deepest layer) have shown comparatively many fewer fossils than the Cambrian layer and have little relation to the fossils found in the Cambrian layer.

Because after all animals don't migrate and would never walk there on their own.

[QUOTE=stackny]
-The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that everything breaks down, not becomes more complex. (this makes the idea of something as complex as DNA arising from the primordial soup a scientific impossibility)

So essentially we should all be rocket scientists at birth and be complete morons without a developed bone structure in our later years. Y'know, if we start out as something complex and break down over time.


[QUOTE=stackny]
As you can see, this entire evolutionary theory is based upon the most coincidal conditions ever to be explained by science. Its just not possible.

To say that adaptation occurs? Adaptation isn't possible? Change your entire living environment to match that of the Amish lifestyle. Then live that way for a couple years. After a while it'll be like second nature. Why's that? Because you've changed your environment and you've adapted to it. How is it "just not possible" to say that two creatures procreate and their genetics go on to another creature who procreates with another creature thus creating a whole different mish-mash of genes and so on and so on?